Skip to main content

tv   Inside Washington  WETA  March 18, 2011 8:30pm-9:00pm EDT

8:30 pm
its auto insurance customers for over 70 years.e to more information on auto insurance at or 1-800-947-auto any time of the day or night.
8:31 pm
>> what do you think of when you see a tree? at treatment for cancer? alternative of fuel for our cars? do you think of hope for the environment, or food, clothing, shelter? we do. weyerhaeuser, growing ideas. >> this week on "inside washington," the u.n. gives the green light to the attacks on
8:32 pm
libya. >> the people of libya must be protected and have the opportunity to express themselves freely. >> we are doing everything we can to stand by our great friend and ally japan in this hour of need. >> the nuclear crisis in japan -- could it happen here? >> we have a situation that is scaring the life out of everybody. >> time to start thinking about the 2012 republican nominee. what about the donald? >> i have never been so serious as i am now. >> march madness is here. do you have your brackets? captioned by the national captioning institute it was a 10-0 vote, five
8:33 pm
abstentions. the u.n. authorized the use of all necessary measures to protect civilians in libya. here is susan rice, our u.n. ambassador. >> the security council has authorized the use of force, including enforcement of the no fly zone, to protect civilians and a civilian areas targeted by colonel gaddafi, his intelligence and security forces, and his mercenaries. >> shortly after, the u.n. foreign ministers said the countries declaring an immediate cease-fire and halted all military operations. right after that, oil prices dropped. meanwhile, the no-fly zone. what about gaddafi's tanks and artillery? is this too little too late, and given our involvement in afghanistan and iraq, should we be stepping into this at all, charles? >> it is late, and if you are going to strike, you have to
8:34 pm
strike hard and is serious and early. happening now, what we have produced is a stalemate, and now for the future, we are going to have to protect the rebels. it is going to be an ongoing and a long operation, unfortunately. >> mark? >> the consequences of war are dairen at sacrifices in measurable. those are the -- "and the consequences of war are dire and the sacrifices in measurable." those other words of senator barack obama in 2002. i hope if we go in there is congressional debate and congressional approval. >> nina? >> it is unclear if gaddafi will abide by his own cease-fire or if the rebels will. this is a genuinely international agreement to do
8:35 pm
something, and i'm a perfectly willing to hold the codes of the french, the brits, and some from the arab league. we are very committed at the moment on other fronts, and i don't mind at the united states participating in a genuinely international effort. but i don't want to be involved in a third front as an american. >> colby? >> they went about it the right way. they needed to get the endorsement of the arab league, needed to have united nations take a clear position on this before any kind of action, whether it is led by our allies or whether we participate. there needed to be an international front. what happened? gaddafi aig effect -- in effect folded once he realized there would be international action. >> haven't we heard warnings from the generals and the secretary of defense and as secretary of state about the risks of a no-fly zone?
8:36 pm
>> exactly. that is exactly why i am grateful we are not the leading force on this. >> what about charles's point? >> i think the mandate to protect civilians will give united nations forces a lot of wiggle room as far as going into the country or providing the means to protect civilians. you can interpret that very liberally. >> here is my question -- what is the commitment? for how long? what are our goals? exit strategy? is anybody going to ask those questions? >> that is why we need a full public debate in the congress on this. the french and the birds are already there -- brits are already there. the idea of a stumbling into a command while emotions are high and the bands are playing and
8:37 pm
the commitment of blood and life comes later. >> the europeans -- the french and british have relatively serious air forces. you can use italian air bases. this is not afghanistan, a lot of hiding places and caves. great tank battles in history have been fought on a libyan the sand. that is why gaddafi stopped because he knows that all the artillery and ships he has offshore can be knocked out in half an hour. it is uniquely favorable. if the arab league is behind this, what you do is get arab soldiers in benghazi training. not americans and not nato. >> if the arab league is says is behind this, we are behind you,
8:38 pm
you go first -- >> it is going to be a ground effort and will involve not action but trading -- training. >> you take away from gaddafi the argument that this is some sort of western intervention into the country. you have the arab league on record here and i don't think that is insignificant. >> i know this is messy and it may not end in the way we all want it to, but it is far preferable to going in and pick it -- and bigfooting once again -- >> the price of oil dropped $3 on the new york mercantile exchange. is this about protecting civilians or about protecting oil? >> it is probably about both. the prospect of a genuine massacre genuinely worried
8:39 pm
people. but there's no pretending that this is not about oil. >> and what is going on in bahrain with the involvement of the saudis, and the real explicit struggle between sunnis and shiites in this area, and iran on behalf of the shiites, and iraq on behalf of the shiites in bahrain. >> bob rayner really is a sticking point -- bahrain really is a sticking point. towe have told the saudis, "do not send troops in," and troops have gone in. with respect it qatar and the united arab emirates, those are not the great forces in military history. >> bahrain is a bank with a harbor and iran has claimed it away iraq claimed to wait --
8:40 pm
kuwait. >> there is concern in the u.s. that a similar accident could occur here. >> i would not take anything like that at face value. >> that is democratic congressman henry waxman of california. he is reacting to a question of whether nuclear reactors are safe. he says he cannot answer that question, nobody can. everybody looks at this says there is -- every time you look at this there is more threat of nuclear contamination. american officials were questioning whether the japanese were entirely forthcoming, whether they had understated the seriousness of the situation. what is the potential for similar nuclear disaster in the united states? there is talk of a nuclear resurgence in this country. is this going to put an end to that, colby? >> japan was hit with a triple
8:41 pm
when he, at the earthquake, tsunami, and -- a triple whammy, the earthquake, tsunami, and at the nuclear disaster. we have to worry about what would happen with some of these plants on the fal -- fault lines, particularly in new york and san francisco. six or seven states in this country depend on a nuclear power. now, this is not going to stop what we're doing, it will cause us to pause and review our own standards to make sure we have plans up to speed -- >> but who would be more careful about nuclear power than the japanese? very precise about everything. >> they did the best they could, and that is the point. 13 minutes to evacuate, and the fact that so many people got out is a testament to all the drilling and care that they
8:42 pm
took. for all the talk about nuclear power here, and the obama administration of's evers to into rigid, there is relatively little -- efforts to into rigid, there is relatively little new nuclear power being built in the united states. it is irresponsible not deposit more than a moment and make sure we are up to -- not to pause more than a moment and make sure we are out to snuff as we can be. >> is it on the ropes now? >> on the ropes, a mandatory eight count, perhaps two. the nuclear industry has always been a problem. every presidential debate we go to yucca flats in nevada and argue about what we are good to do with nuclear waste. we have never decided. given the seriousness and gravity of the problem with energy in the middle east, there
8:43 pm
was an opening with a nuclear energy and that is closing fast from japan. the >> the french figured out what to do with nuclear waste. they export energy now. >> they process it into plutonium, which we don't like to do. i think it nuclear is dead because of this. if the three mile island, which was a take compared to this, -- picnic compared to this, compared to two four reactors and no human error -- human heroism, in fact -- and it is a disaster. chernobyl is the gold standard, and it is going to be a problem that will take weeks and will leave a residue for years. the resurgence of a nuclear in america is dead. we will keep the plants we have,
8:44 pm
and the germans have taken it seven of their 17 offline. the chinese, who are kind of reckless environmentally, suspended production. it is over for nuclear. >> the prospect of bringing nuclear plants on line is not very great anyway in the beginning. why? because wall street would have to finance those power plants, and there is no interest on wall street in undertaking that investment. >> the federal government under obama and bush were offering huge loan guarantees as a way to step in an override the market and encourage this. that is not going to go on. >> oil is a problem because of what is going on in the middle east. no sign that that is going to end anytime soon. we're not supposed to burn coal.
8:45 pm
what do we do? >> oil is off the table because of the panic over the gulf oil spill. the obama administration essentially ended it deepwater drilling. two of the rigs have sailed away to west africa. u.s. accidents with nuclear. -- you have accidents with nuclear. coal is dirty. we will probably have to go very heavily with the natural gas. anybody who imagines that solar and wind are anywhere near for the next 20, 25 years, providing huge amounts of electrical energy that we need it does not know anything about the energy industry, and that is why we are stuck. we are going to have to tolerate the carbon emissions which the epa now wants to suppress, which would shut out coal plants and leave was shivering in the winter. >> know where it is "sacrifice"
8:46 pm
mentioned here. >> and no where is mentioned " independents." what happens at the house of balls in saudi arabia? if it falls under the in -- house falls in saudi arabia? if it falls under the influence of iran, we have major problems, boys and girls. >> as charles has said, there are enormous risks with deep water drilling, and the consequences of an accident there are enormous. we talked about nuclear. gas is probably the best solution, and you could have a clean coal, but it requires new plants and scrubbers and costs more money. other countries do conserve more than we do.
8:47 pm
i am not saying it is the solution, but i am saying that other countries do a far better job and reduce consumption by 20% compared to us. >> if gasoline $26 a gallon, it would be catastrophic for the economy, but on the other hand they would be building -- >> absolutely true, but as i listen to my colleagues, we have two options. we can shiver and have clean air or we can cough and be warm. that seems to be the trade-offs we are looking at. i am not arguing with them, because the clean and green campaign has never gotten the kind of popular attraction in this country, and it comes back to something colby said, that any effort ought to be about national independence rather than a good feeling about the environment. >> the epa proposed a set of
8:48 pm
rules that would clean up in the coal industry and requires them is they were talking about -- the industry is going crazy and there it would be all kinds of reaction from those who support the industry. even when we try to do something domestically, that would advance not only at the health and welfare but the industry and make more reliable, you get this reaction. >> in the week -- you have got to be on the ideological extreme went on the week that nuclear has died, he pa -- you push restrictions on call. i in for a gas tax since 1983, and we should have done it two years ago. nobody had the will to do it. >> republican message of
8:49 pm
politics, and next. >> if i run, i will try to win iowa. >> part of the beauty of me is that i am very rich. i can set up $600 million myself. >> donald trump, interviewed by ashleigh banfield, preceded by mississippi gov. haley barbour. mark, you once said that haley barbour would be the anti-obama. what would donald trump be? >> the candidate for people who say "i am rich as hell and not going to take it anymore." his private plane with his private hair -- [laughter] i am dying for him to run. first press conference, first edition -- first fish fly in
8:50 pm
cedar rapids. >> what about haley barbour? >> he has just got to be in it not to be president of the united states but to have some impact on the nominee. haley barbour's chances of becoming president of the united states are about as good as mine 15-pound dog. >> never say never. >> haley barber looks at the wheel, i think with a pretty studied, expert eye, i think he sees as his principal challenger mitch daniels of indiana, somebody he respects and who has walked the walk and talk the talk. >> daniels, santorum, gingrich, huckabee, palin. >> of the people will now out
8:51 pm
front, starting with romney, who if it were not for romneycare would be the presumptive nominee -- they all have baggage. republicans have a strong young bench for 2016. paul ryan, marco rubio, chris christie. i think what will happen is that if by mid year, nobody in the current pact emerges as a viable candidate who could wind, they might go to christie or ryan and take a chance of somebody who otherwise might be too young or premature. >> i think there is some merit to that, except when we have done that in the past in either party, with the exception of obama, it has tended to bite the party in the fanny. i think it is more likely that this will shake down and we will
8:52 pm
get to a serious core of people. haley barbour illustrates both the pros and cons of the situation. he is actually a serious person who does not look serious. >> he is marked. >> -- is smart. >> and he has it baggage that has haunted him. >> i have known in a barber for years and he is smart but he is very crafty. his candidacy seems to be appealing to that part of the republican party that represents a throwback to the old days. when he takes the position that he will not pass judgment on the founder of the kkk, a really despicable individual, that is almost -- >> i think he backed off that. >> you cannot back off of that, not in the modern era. >> haley barbour did get 40%
8:53 pm
of the african-american vote on the coast after his performance in it katrina, far superior to the elected officials in louisiana. at this 0.4 years ago, there were eight republicans already in the race and 10 democrats. what is holding them back? people's perception that because barack obama is close -- to defeat the false perception -- that because -- the false perception that because barack obama is close to the% approval and has about $1 billion campaign chest, and he is unbeatable. at this point in 1991 and george herbert walker bush was 89% approval and bill clinton beat him 18 months later. a week is a lifetime in politics
8:54 pm
and a three months is eternity and that is what republicans are for getting. >> that is why it might end up a dark horse. i will bet that daniels will likely not run, certainly huckabee won't, palin is not going to. haley barbour was a tobacco lobbyist. it is not a good environment you want to run in your a former lobbyist. >> michelle bachmann was in new hampshire over the weekend. >> she went to the people of new hampshire and said it is great to be in a state where they fired the first shot against the british in concord and lexington, forgetting that it was concord, massachusetts, not concord, new hampshire. go back to no child left behind. >> thank you for setting the record straight. i thought i was misinformed. >> last year i picked north
8:55 pm
carolina and they lost. the next year they won for me. they always feel bad about losing when the president picks them. >> that was president obama 0 on espn picking his n.c.a.a. tournament brackets. i want to talk about that. -- i don't want to talk about that. i want to talk about arne duncan, secretary of education, and his op-ed in "the post." >> he is absolutely right. we love march madness and office pools and everything about it. but schools enrolling students to make sure that they do graduate and put them on the road to graduation -- when you see university of kentucky last year 05 players first-year gone to the nba, you began to
8:56 pm
question that. >> i am perfectly willing to hold the schools accountable, and the n.c.a.a. has not covered itself in glory. but if the nba is offering millions of dollars to these kids an, why wouldn't they go to the nba? >> it is not limited to basketball. you can take it to football as well. they are exploiting these kids. they are not trying to educate them. that is not why they are there. they are there to win game. if they win games, the school gets money. >> i am with colby, is out and out explications. the idea of these -- it is out and out exploitation. the idea of these athletes to being students is a farce. let them be paid. these are the minor leagues of
8:57 pm
basketball, football, let's be honest. . let them earn a piece of the huge amount of money they make on television for the schools. >> if the n.c.a.a. barred schools with low graduation rates or participating in the tournament, you would see graduation rates improve. let's give a shot out to schools that do graduate. my alma mater noted game is in the front -- notre dame is in the front rank, as is georgetown. >> is georgetown 100%? thanks, last word. see you next week. for a transcript of this broadcast, log on to vo:geico, committed to providing service to
8:58 pm
its auto insurance customers for over 70 years. more information on auto insurance at or 1-800-947-auto any time of the day or night.
8:59 pm


disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on